Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Rendering unto Caesar

Picture credit: Rights Info
0
This discussion has been closed.
Picture credit: Rights Info
Comments
Great article.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1108766076412850179 You'd hope so. But I must say I am not quite buying that they really are worried - they'd have been more amenable to the deal before now if that were so. I think they are worried at not being seen to worry about no deal, so it cannot be counted on that they will take appropriate measures, whatever those may be, to stop it. They too are just interested in the blame game.
An important point, because they have tried to suggest otherwise, even as they then confirm opposition is about believing it incompatible with their faith.
Making rights dependant on group identity devolves power to self-appointed community leaders, usually male, and in a capricious way, often with actual violence (or the threat of it). It means that there are hierarchies of British citizens: those able to exercise all their rights and those whose rights are subordinate to the group they belong to, without them having any say in whether they want this to happen.
Insidious stuff.
A very powerful conclusion from Cyclefree. I'm biased because I agree with it, but it is still a stirring and compelling article, and I hope some courage is shown.
It’s not a player.
There’s perfectly rational politics behind this government preferring no deal to revoke. This rationale removes revoke from the equation
The outcome sought by May and Gove is No deal saves the Tory party, revoke causes it problems (some things are being bigged up too much in this situation, but, yes, existential problems). Especially if with No deal you can stich other people up at the same time...
The first component is nobody has convincingly explained why no deal is preferable to the WA. What is labours argument with WA that makes it worse than no deal? They Don’t have one. They are operating on the basis they can get some unicorn different from both WA and No Deal. That is the fantasy their actions in the commons are based on. So there are your patsy’s to take the hit for everything that goes wrong with a no deal the government didn’t want but opposition created for the nation. (OGH ran a header on this today, so easy to close your eyes and see the media barrage shredding labour)
The second component is No Deal delivers Brexit. Huge portions of both public and Tory Members want Brexit delivered, and aren’t afraid of No Deal. In contrast what happens if the Government goes for revoke or even long delay?
Unless there is a change of government between now and 29th, there is no revoke option.
https://www.spiked-online.com/2018/02/28/stop-this-moral-crusade-against-circumcision/
He was not a fan of Islam it has to be said but agreed with parts of their stance on gays........
Mind you he did say he didn't advocate the death penalty.
We no longer lunch..............
I would add the perception that the religious views of some communities are effectively supported ahead of others to avoid being accused of racism. We need a level playing field for all religions. That is not racism, it is equality. Which should be our overarching priority.
A muslim chap - and I still have no idea how the subject came up but he led into it whilst talking about how different sects of Islam basically hate each other .... anyway somehow this led him into him deciding to educate me about the islamic practice of removing all body hair.......
to much info :-)
One question to The House as I don't know the legal position. Since the governance of NI has been temporarily returned to Westminster because of the stalemate at Stormont could Parliament not legislate right now to sweep away the bigotry laws in NI?
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/mar/19/fresh-complaints-about-lgbt-lessons-at-greater-manchester-primary-schools
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_irreligion
Anyway, I must be off. Bye, sinners.
Contingency planning has largely, I think, been predicated on the fact that we’ll get a deal and life will move on.
There’s gonna be a hell of a lot of craziness if a week on Monday people are faced with the reality that the logistics networks in the country have ground to a halt.
I have friends who are very frum, and live in North London, and send their children to a hyper-orthodox state funded Jewish school. It's fair to say that said school does not teach homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle choice.
This is a really, really difficult area. How much do we allow the state to dictate what is and isn't acceptable behaviour? What about private schools? Etc etc.
https://news.sky.com/story/birmingham-pub-bombings-were-ira-operation-gone-badly-wrong-inquest-hears-11671729
To be clear, I could never have an abortion myself. I have never been in a position where I have had to consider it. When I was pregnant with my last child I had to have a test for Downs and I was a bit horrified at the assumption made by the hospital that, if the result were positive, I would have an abortion. The pregnancy was very much wanted. Fortunately, all was OK. I mention this because these are such personal and emotional decisions and at such a time what one needs is help, comfort and advice not sermons.
My view is that it should be safe, legal but rarer than it is, in an ideal world. But we are not in an ideal world and other women should have access to it and make their own decisions about their fertility.
Reminds me of John Stuart Mills "On Liberty" - a must read for everyone.
- specifically repealing section 7(3) and replacing it with a clause explicitly extending its territorial scope to Northern Ireland. Similarly any other piece of legislation could be extended to cover NI. However politically that would be very difficult because of the Sewel Convention -
"14. The United Kingdom Parliament retains authority to legislate on any issue, whether devolved or not. It is ultimately for Parliament to decide what use to make of that power. However, the UK Government will proceed in accordance with the convention that the UK Parliament would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters except with the agreement of the devolved legislature. The devolved administrations will be responsible for seeking such agreement as may be required for this purpose on an approach from the UK Government."
- Memorandum of Understanding between the UK Govt and the devolved administrations
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/316157/MoU_between_the_UK_and_the_Devolved_Administrations.pdf
https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1108757367506767872
1. Homosexuality is not a “lifestyle choice”. It is a fact of nature. That fact needs to be made clear.
2. All schools should have to teach the facts about sexuality - whether religious schools, private schools, academies, whatever. No exceptions.
3. The state is not dictating behaviour. It is setting out the facts - about sexuality, about the law. And it has an interest in ensuring that people are not taught or enabled to behave in a way which can lead to crimes. Think of it as an example of “nudge” theory.
Whilst I know you yourself are not guilty of this, we do have a big problem in that there are people in this country who love nothing more than to stick the knife into Muslims
or...
Whilst I know you yourself are not guilty of this, we do have a big problem in that there are people in this country who love nothing more than to stick the knife into Jews
Then your point would have been equally valid.
I would take May's deal in a heartbeat. But if the only options available are to remain or to crash out with no deal, then remain is the only sensible option left. The country cannot be allowed to crash out to no deal. We are simply not prepared. Put another way, would you trust this government - who could not organise a piss up in a brewery - to have made adequate preparations for a no deal exit?
The sad thing is that leaving - via May's deal that disentangles us from most of the EU, if not all, but certainly from the nefarious political projects of the EU - is within reach. It's there.
But the extremists on both sides will not compromise. They will not be forgiven.
I would like to add one complicating factor, however: culture. Some things are *not* mainstays of a religion, and are in fact cultural: yet the proponents want to use religion as an excuse for a cultural practice. FGM is a good example, where it is practiced by some Christian groups (and even, in the past, some Jews), and views on it within Islam are mixed, to say the least.
Even the Burkha and Hajib can be seen as more of a cultural than a religious practice: although even there the boundaries are very blurred.
He believes that societies thrive when diverse opinions are expressed, whether those opinions are right or wrong. Hearing diverse opinions strengthens your own views because you have to defend them rather than passively hold them, - and it may even cause you to change your views.
John Stuart Mill would really approve of politicalbetting.com for the reasons above.
Revoke - horrible for democracy without the cover of a referendum
Deal - the logical answer but seems doomed
So basically we are relying on the EU twiddling their thumbs for 1 or 2 years while Britain has a midlife crisis. Ain't gonna happen
Thurrock: Independent (formerly UKIP) resignation - Inds are standing again but an interesting Lab v Con tussle here.
Basildon: Labour resignation - a straight Lab v Con contest; Labour looks favourite
Southend: Labour death - looks safe for Labour
Kensington: Labour resignation - safe Labour
Newcastle-u-Lyme: Labour resignation - safe Labour. Being contested by the 'SDP'
Durham: LibDem resignation - LibDem v Labour, LibDems look favourites
Deal - Clearly, the sane option. Repeatedly rejected.
Revoke - works, but has to be simultaneously accompanied by a combination of a) May's resignation, b) a second referendum (deal or no deal, but we have to revoke to do it on our timeframe rather than the EU's) or c) a general election ("let the next lot sort it out, but also judge us for our decision to revoke")
No Deal - mad
Extension - sad
Referendum - glad
The writing was on the wall then. MPs who kept her then but complain now are pathetic. Nothing has changed.
a) deal repeatedly rejected
b) no-one prepared for No deal
c) no chance of a long extension
Revoke is the sane option.
And as I said before chances are TIG or some other pro-EU group will win enough votes to be the biggest UK party...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=205&v=gkZGPCBlA6U
In 2019, the Brexit parties won't get 50% of the vote.